23
My buddy at the bar last night said the moon landing footage was faked in a studio, and his 'proof' was the flag waving. I looked it up when I got home.
He was so sure, said he saw a documentary. The flag thing is the oldest one in the book. NASA explains the rippling was from the pole being twisted into the ground, no air needed. It took me five minutes on my phone to find the debunk. It's wild how these ideas stick around. What's the most common 'proof' you guys hear that's actually been explained a hundred times?
4 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In4 Comments
william86429d ago
Got a friend who swears the Van Allen radiation belts would have cooked the astronauts. I fell for that one myself a few years back before actually reading how short and quick the trip through them was. Felt pretty silly after that deep dive, like I'd been arguing about a movie I only read the summary for. The math on the shielding and exposure time is all out there, clear as day. Some of these myths are just so baked in, it takes real work to unlearn them.
7
angela_harris29d ago
Yeah, that "baked in" part, @william864. Had to check the facts myself.
8
My cousin tried to tell me the astronauts couldn't have taken pictures because the film would have melted. He read it on some forum. The cameras were specially built and the lunar module wasn't that hot. It's another thing that sounds smart until you look it up for two seconds. The amount of wrong info out there is just frustrating.
6
piperbailey29d ago
The shadows not being parallel gets brought up a lot. People forget the lunar surface is uneven, so light hits hills and rocks at different angles. It's basic geometry, not studio lights. I saw a great side-by-side photo using a tennis ball and a lamp that showed the exact same effect. Once you see that demo, the whole shadow argument falls apart completely. What's the weirdest source someone has tried to use as proof for you?
4